COLUMBUS, Ohio — In a push to bolster Ohio’s energy landscape, state legislators are wrestling with innovative strategies to lure new power producers while easing the financial burden on residents. Two distinct legislative proposals have emerged, each aiming to address the pressing need for reliable energy to support burgeoning tech hubs and prevent power outages, all while slashing unnecessary costs for consumers.
On one side, the Ohio House of Representatives has rallied behind House Bill 15, a comprehensive measure that sailed through with a resounding 90-3 vote. Crafted by Rep. Roy Klopfenstein of Haviland, this bill zeroes in on dismantling outdated charges tied to two aging coal facilities—one of which sits across the border in Indiana—along with a solar energy surcharge. Since 2017, these coal plant fees alone have siphoned over $670 million from Ohioans’ wallets, a burden the bill seeks to lift entirely, projecting savings of nearly $600 million by 2030. The solar fee, which has stockpiled over $60 million largely left untouched, would also be scrapped, with refunds issued to ratepayers.
House Bill 15 doesn’t stop there. It slashes property taxes for new energy developers from 24% to a lean 7%, a rate extended to existing plants to keep local school funding intact. Transmission and distribution property taxes would drop from 88% to 25%, incentivizing infrastructure upgrades. The bill also tightens oversight of utility billing, axing loosely regulated “electric security plans” and mandating refunds for any charges deemed unjust by the Ohio Supreme Court—effective from the date of the ruling.
“This is about putting money back where it belongs—with Ohio families,” declared Rep. Sean Patrick Brennan of Parma, hailing the bill as a victory for affordability.
Meanwhile, the Ohio Senate has countered with its own vision in Senate Bill 2, which cleared the chamber unanimously. While sharing the House’s goal of energy abundance and consumer relief, it carves a different path. Instead of trimming the tangible personal property tax for future energy projects, the Senate opts to erase it entirely for power generated after 2025. Collected solar fees, rather than being refunded, would be redirected to schools for energy efficiency upgrades. The Senate also floats unique ideas, like letting local officials dictate the placement of anaerobic digesters—tanks that convert waste into energy—and offering a $40 yearly credit to customers who allow utilities to tweak their smart thermostats during peak demand.
The debate has stirred passionate voices. Rep. Josh Williams of Sylvania Township framed House Bill 15 as a reckoning for past corruption, pointing to the coal fees’ ties to a bribery scandal that landed ex-Speaker Larry Householder a 20-year prison sentence. “We’re sending a message: exploit Ohioans, and we’ll claw back every penny,” he said. Yet, Rep. Jason Stephens of Kitts Hill, where one coal plant operates, argued for a phased approach to ending the fees, calling an abrupt cut “unfair” to local stakeholders. Rep. Don Jones of Freeport echoed the need for a buffer period to soften the blow to industry.
With both bills undergoing multiple revisions, lawmakers face the task of reconciling their differences—tax structures, fee allocations, and bold new concepts like the House’s Community Energy Pilot Program, which would greenlight small-scale, local power initiatives. Senate President Matt Huffman of Lima anticipates negotiations kicking off in April, emphasizing a shared resolve: “Subsidies for utilities are off the table.”
The final legislation, destined for Gov. Mike DeWine’s desk, would redefine how the state powers its future.